Abstract

How is aesthetic autonomy to be conceived if one does not want to lose an explanation of the connection between art and human practice in general? The starting point of the present paper is the claim that Hegel overlooks aesthetic autonomy because he wants to explain how art is operative within human practice. He does not conceive the sensuous-material aspects of art- works in their independence. Goodman’s notion of exemplification corrects this shortcoming. But his explanation of the relevance of independent sensuous-material aspects of artworks fails to give us an understanding of aesthetic autonomy, too. I argue that it is possible to avoid such a negative conclusion if one understands the self-referential constitution of sensuous-material shapings in an artwork as the basis of aesthetic autonomy. At the same time, such an under- standing allows for a conception of the potency of art within human practice.